MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202368660 · doi:10.22329/il.v41i3.6873

Introduction to the Special Issue

2021· article· en· W3202368660 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lilián Bermejo-Luque, Andrei Moldovan

Bibliographic record

VenueInformal Logic · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMulti-Agent Systems and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpistemologyPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We think that this collection of papers illustrates the relevance \nand fruitfulness of a pragmatic-linguistic approach to the normative \nstudy of argumentation. As scholars working on such an \napproach, we can only thank the editors of Informal Logic for their \nenthusiastic reception of our proposal to produce this special \nvolume. Finally, we also wish to thank the rigorous and inspiring \nwork of not only the authors but also the generous reviewers of \nthese papers, who have decisively contributed to increasing the \ninterest of this promising line of research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2890.170

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInformal LogicSame topicMulti-Agent Systems and NegotiationFrench-language works237,207